Cutting off the countryside sounds like democratic centralism , too. I don't know whether it is mushy.
Rhetoric is all there is on e-mail.
CB
>>> Tom Lehman <uswa12 at Lorainccc.edu> 10/07/99 05:43PM >>>
Rah! Rah! Rah! And what's that have to do with further weakening the already weak AFL-CIO by merging and eliminating the rural and small town feds. The AFL-CIO needs bigger numbers not smaller numbers and regardless of your rhetorical style cutting off your ties with the countryside sure isn't going to help matters any.
Tom Lehman
Charles Brown wrote:
> But hasn't the opportunism of mushy centrism been the 50 year failed strategy of Reutherism/Meanyism, failing both the U.S. working class and proletarian internationalism ? It has been tried and it doesn't work. The bosses just keep eating away at our Faustian bargain , our social securities. Those devils are insatiable. It don't fly. Pragmatism with a larger scope would suggest trying a new approach from "mushy". There's no progress without struggle, especially class struggle. If we don't figure out how to tranform mushy centrism into militant class struggle trade unionism, and not trade unionism plain and simple either, they may bury us.
>
> CB
> >>> "Nathan Newman" <nathan.newman at yale.edu> 10/07/99 03:33PM >>>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> > Curiously enough, freerepublic.com is one of the leading sources of
> > visitors to the LBO website. I think we "insane" people are united in
> > our distaste for mushy centrism, as much as we differ on everything
> > else.
>
> -clip_
> The fact is that trashing "mushy centrism" is like trashing gravity. You
> may not like falling down and you may not like that politics fishes for
> votes on the 50%-yard line, but it is just there. Bashing it is worse than
> intellectual self-indulgence- it ignores all the politics railing behind
> the inevitable mushy centrist rhetoric.
>
> What this thread started on, how to structure the labor movement for maximum
> mobilization of the membership, is precisely the kind of subterranean
> politics that matters, that is ignored in too much focus on the day-to-day
> mush of 50-yard line politics. But the hard fact is that the key to the
> game is grassroots mobilization that moves the goal posts and the center of
> political gravity. The rhetoric - especially among Presidential candidates
> playing hardline at that centrist game - will remain mushy, but the change
> will be where the center of the mush is located.
>
> The fact remains that every increase in union membership and other
> grassroots mobilization helps shift that center. No amount of rhetoric from
> the top will do it.
>
> What bothers me most is that a discussion specifically on exactly the stakes
> involved in restructuring the AFL-CIO, an issue far more important
> ultimately to our political future than most issues, was immediately
> diverted into rhetorical bashing of the Democratic Party.
>
> This is the problem with the impulse to bash mushy centrism. Its so much
> fun that discussions of the nuts of bolts of organizing get dropped.
>
> --Nathan Newman